Well, this post was originally slated for posting on Christmas Eve, but the festivities of the evening (and my duties as "Santa", eating Christmas cookies, chewing up carrots, etc...) put blogging on the back burner. Now that the Christmas revelry has died down and we are getting back to some semblance of normalcy, I figured I do a little Christmas wrap-up today.
A recent survey by the Barna Research Group, asked adults what they believed about the virgin birth of Jesus--Was this story literally true or not? Across all demographic spectrums most adults said they did believe in the truth of that biblical story. In fact, 3 out of 4 (75%) of all adults said they believe that Jesus was born to the virgin, Mary.
As one might expect, a large majority of those who do not profess religious faith or belief in God did not believe the story to be true. Only 15% of atheists/agnostics said they believe in the virgin birth as a literal story. But that is what is so particularly surprising, not so much because of the agnostic responses. One can understand a varying set of beliefs based on their "I'm not sure" agnostic perspective. But it was more specifically the responses of the atheists which caught my attention. Shouldn't the percentage of atheists who believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ be 0%?
I hesitate to conjecture too much about this, but this inconsistency seems to indicate a desire to "have your cake and eat it too" as it were. I've talked about this in the past as it relates to morality in particular, that those who don't believe in God (and who interpret the world through the lens of evolution) then want to embrace aspects of the world that are desirable, yet inconsistent, with their belief system (e.g. the notion of altruism--that noble idea that one sacrifices him/herself without expecting anything in return). The inherently Christian idea of sacrificial love for others (as epitomized in the death of Christianity's founder, Jesus) is certainly desirable and should be lauded in our society. And indeed it is, by Christians and non-religious people alike. But I still haven't been able to figure out in my own mind how one can embrace this noble idea of sacrifice for the welfare of others while holding to the theory of evolution for the explanation of the world--a worldview which is inherently built on the guiding principle of self-preservation above all else.
On a related note, the responses to this survey raise the other significant question of biblical interpretation. Why would a non-religious person (or even a religious person) believe in the supernatural story of the virgin birth and not, for example, believe in the supernatural story of Jesus resurrection from the dead? On what does a person base his/her interpretation of the Bible? Is it based on solid evidence or personal whim? There are some some critical questions that each person, Christian and non-Christian alike, much ask themselves when considering any biblical passage (and indeed, a particular passage in light of the whole Bible).
Our beliefs about the Bible are a significant indicator of our worldview. The story of Christ's birth could be seen simply as a traditional element of the Christmas season, but we must not overlook the implications of that story in light of the entire Christian worldview. But for the birth of Immanuel ("God with us"), the possibility of salvation and eternity in heaven would always lay well beyond our grasp. 
i responded!
http://flickerbulb.com/2007/12/28/altruism-and-evolution/
Posted by: Liberace | December 28, 2007 at 02:16 PM